Hi Navin
The JX92 was developed specifically as a fullrange, part of Ted's development work which goes back to the 1960s. In an article for Wireless World in the early 70s, he discussed drivers and argued that a 4 inch unit was the ideal size to balance the compromises necessary to produce a single, fullrange unit. I think the designer for the Horn Shoppe has posted an article which came to the same conclusion.
The JXR6 was developed from the HF down, so that and the earlier 50mm units were always intended to need bass units for support.
The big advantage of using a fullrange unit for bass mid is that it makes matching a HF unit much, much more flexible. I know of one designer who uses a 10" unit and just rolls in the ribbon unit at HF, with the main unit designed to roll off gently above 10kHz with no crossover component.
FWIW, I think the best way of doing it is using a unit to cover the mid-HF and make a bass the second unit. That was there are no crossover or phase problems in the sensitive HF region. At some stage I'll try this with the JXR6 on a similar size baffle that I use for the JX92 and see how the imaging compares. If you want Bose-size boxes for surround, the little JXR6 works a treat, but needs more work matching into a bass system.
Having seen how much people are willing to pay for commercial systems with relatively inexpensive drivers, I'm always baffled why the Jordan units are perceived to be expensive. Try Lowther prices sometime ...
The JX92 was developed specifically as a fullrange, part of Ted's development work which goes back to the 1960s. In an article for Wireless World in the early 70s, he discussed drivers and argued that a 4 inch unit was the ideal size to balance the compromises necessary to produce a single, fullrange unit. I think the designer for the Horn Shoppe has posted an article which came to the same conclusion.
The JXR6 was developed from the HF down, so that and the earlier 50mm units were always intended to need bass units for support.
The big advantage of using a fullrange unit for bass mid is that it makes matching a HF unit much, much more flexible. I know of one designer who uses a 10" unit and just rolls in the ribbon unit at HF, with the main unit designed to roll off gently above 10kHz with no crossover component.
FWIW, I think the best way of doing it is using a unit to cover the mid-HF and make a bass the second unit. That was there are no crossover or phase problems in the sensitive HF region. At some stage I'll try this with the JXR6 on a similar size baffle that I use for the JX92 and see how the imaging compares. If you want Bose-size boxes for surround, the little JXR6 works a treat, but needs more work matching into a bass system.
Having seen how much people are willing to pay for commercial systems with relatively inexpensive drivers, I'm always baffled why the Jordan units are perceived to be expensive. Try Lowther prices sometime ...
And, of course, you can use the JX92 as mid-HF but the JXR6 does a better job from 200Hz up, certainly in the HF.
... Which is taking this thread away from Jim's cracking 92 design, which must be rare in its ability to work as a mini-monitor, satellite or wide range speaker, all from the same basic design. I'd have thought that made it ideal for surround use.
... Which is taking this thread away from Jim's cracking 92 design, which must be rare in its ability to work as a mini-monitor, satellite or wide range speaker, all from the same basic design. I'd have thought that made it ideal for surround use.
Colin said:
HI Colin, I have been following Ted work since the original 50mm unit came out in the 70s I think. It was terrible inefficient so most designers would use them in sets of 2-4. I assume that seeing this trend Ted worked on improving the driers ability to be used in a line array.
Yes I too agree that 4" is aboutthe right size for a fullrange unit. From some wideband midrnages (Seas Ithink had one that covered 6 1/2 octaves) to the Fostex 103/108 to (speaking of Bose) the Bose 901 (with it's 4" dia Helical voice coil driver) the 4" dia seems to be the general consesus for a fullrange drivers size.
What Jordan has done is (a) improve Low freq ability (X max), (b) tried to extend HF response to above 10K and (c) reduce distortion. The JX92 is a great product and I think maybe even Ted would be one to agree that it can be refined further. From 100hz to 10KHz is might well be the best driver out there.
Jim's reason to drop in a tweeter at 3k in his great design is (as he states) to reduce the effects of beaming which is primarily a factor of the driver's size (I wont be surprised if the next version of the JX92 - i assmue he'd call it the JxR9 - would have solved this to some degree).
And yes, I too believe, a system using 5 JX92 ($800) and 2 G2si ($200) mated to a sub ($200) should manhandle any $2000-2500 HT/AV package system available.
Colin said:
Why not for front speakers (if mated to a sub)?
I would guess that the JX92 is the driver to use if you are looking at a good response from 100Hz +. If however your degin allows you to crossover the bass at 200Hz or higher the JxR6 is better.
Hello everybody,
I am new to this forum (but old on others) and am a DIY fan. Time has come for me to try these interesting full range speakers. So I bought yesterday a pair of JX92s and am looking for a good and proven design.
So my choice came naturally to Jim's production. Can someone send me the detailed design (the one without tweeter, this will come later) to my mail jolylds@yahoo.fr ?
I will build Jim's first, then a MTL (it will be my first MTL) to see the difference and ear them in my room.
Thanks
Jumper
I am new to this forum (but old on others) and am a DIY fan. Time has come for me to try these interesting full range speakers. So I bought yesterday a pair of JX92s and am looking for a good and proven design.
So my choice came naturally to Jim's production. Can someone send me the detailed design (the one without tweeter, this will come later) to my mail jolylds@yahoo.fr ?
I will build Jim's first, then a MTL (it will be my first MTL) to see the difference and ear them in my room.
Thanks
Jumper
Hi - this thread gives a pretty good overview of the MLTL design and (I think) a comment or two on how it compares to Jim's original bookshelf design.
I have a copy of the bookshelf's original PDF but Jim may prefer to send it to you. Alternatively, the 8 litre design on the Jordan site will be similar.
I have a copy of the bookshelf's original PDF but Jim may prefer to send it to you. Alternatively, the 8 litre design on the Jordan site will be similar.
Hi JJ - Yes the battery trick is a reliable way to sort out the positive terminals. Once you've found it, label it. Better still, solder on a short length of cable and use a terminal block inside the cabinet (if it's the MLTL - you won't need a separate one with Jim's reflex as it's smaller). Then run a line down the cabinet to the speaker terminals, caulking the cable all the way. An extra terminal block will muck up the sound far less than poking a soldering iron through the cone whilst juggling driver and solder over an open speaker enclosure.
Navin - if adding a ribbon to the JX92, I'd SERIOUSLY consider Jim's recommendation. He's done all the crossover design (not a trivial task) and it's a well-respected design.
Navin - if adding a ribbon to the JX92, I'd SERIOUSLY consider Jim's recommendation. He's done all the crossover design (not a trivial task) and it's a well-respected design.
Navin,
I can not imagine how you could have any issues with the ribbon tweeters in either my mini-monitor or MLTL designs. The crossover is a high order slope plus the ribbon SPL level is padded to match the sensitivity of the JX92S. So you would likely blowout the JX92S before the ribbon tweeter.
Finally, the MLTL version produces bass below 40 Hz so you would have a full range of music reproduction for all but the lowest bass sounds.
Jim
I can not imagine how you could have any issues with the ribbon tweeters in either my mini-monitor or MLTL designs. The crossover is a high order slope plus the ribbon SPL level is padded to match the sensitivity of the JX92S. So you would likely blowout the JX92S before the ribbon tweeter.
Finally, the MLTL version produces bass below 40 Hz so you would have a full range of music reproduction for all but the lowest bass sounds.
Jim
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.